1. Module 1 TERMS OF REFERENCE Prosper Zo’o Minto’o
Deputy Regional Director, Western and Central Africa International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO)
Regional Workshop on African ANSP Peer Review Programme Manual
25-27 April 2018, Grand Bassam, Cote d’Ivoire
7 December 2018

2. Mandate
The Peer Review Initiative was created pursuant to the Coordination meeting between African Air Navigation Services Providers organized by ICAO in Montreal, 4 February 2015;
The main objective is to establish a peer review mechanism among and between ANSPs to improve the capabilities of the ANSPs and enhance the safety and quality of air navigation services in the AFI region.

3. What is it all about?  
The initiative aims at continuously help ANSPs improve the safety of air navigation in their areas of responsibility. Its activities will be based on:
cross audits by independent teams of auditors from other ANSPs and other bodies of civil aviation;
sharing of experiences and best practices;
mutual assistance;
data protection.

4. Vision & Mission Vision Mission
Define a required minimum level of safety and quality of air navigation services and to assist ANSPs to reach that level by a process of continuous improvement.
Mission
Conduct cross audits among ANSPs, upon their request;
Issue recommendations leading to the improvement of safety and quality;
Ensure the monitoring of the status of implementation of corrective actions arising from the audits; and
Promote mutual assistance among ANSPs.

5. Objectives
Establish and maintain a uniform level of safety for the AFI region which should at least be equal to the international requirements;
Assist ANSP members of the initiative to fulfil their obligations stemming from the Chicago Convention, particularly in terms of air navigation services, including: ATS, the design of flight procedures, AIS, mapping, MET, CNS, SAR; and SMS;
Pooling toolkits, human resources and available training and integrating safety and quality audits within a safety and quality assurance programme specific to the ANSPs in order to reduce certification costs.

6. Strategy : Establish a mechanism of action
Create a coordination team (CT) that meets at defined periods of time to organize the implementation of the chosen mechanism. The team is composed of executives appointed by the ANSP members;
Draft a frame document (MOU) which specifies the terms of cooperation (modalities of assistance and review by peers);
Define a standardized frame of reference: all ANSPs will have at their disposal a SMS and a SMQ both integrated (or not);
Establish a partnership (MOU) with other organizations (ICAO, RSOO, CAAs, etc.), in order to take advantage of their experts in air navigation field, if necessary;
Identify and establish a database of competent experts in all ANS areas;

7. Strategy : Establish a mechanism of action
Develop the documentation:
A program manual;
A referential for standards based on ICAO SARPs, Quality Standards and Best Practices in ANS domain;
ANS Review Protocol Questionnaires (PQs);
Checklists of mandatory evaluations;
A Standards of qualification of reviewers.
Establish a mechanism of recognition of Peer Review Team Members based on agreed requirements.

8. Strategy : Conduct of Reviews
Reviews are carried out by teams of recognized Peer Review Team Members. No Reviewer can be part of the team mandated to review his own organization;
The review reports are sent to the concerned ANSP which will develop the corrective/preventive action plans accordingly;
The corrective/preventive action plans are returned to the CT which will conduct a regular assessment of the status of implementation.

9. Strategy : Organize and conduct follow-up of corrective actions
The CT will conduct, in coordination with the concerned ANSP, a regular assessment of the status of implementation of a CAP;
The CT will develop and update an anonymous database of the findings and opportunities for improvement stemming from the various audits and share them with all ANSPs involved in the initiative, in order to enable them to eventually make corrections to their system and/or adopt the best practices implemented by other ANSPs;
The CT will enable ANSPs to have access to a network of Experts in an ANS area who will be able to provide them support in the implementation of their action plan.

10. Capacity Building
A training program for ASQA audits can be developed in order to build or strengthen capacity within ANSPs.

11. Evaluation of the system
An assessment of the mechanism will be conducted annually in order to correct the imperfections and improve the results.

12. Benefits
Pooling of internal monitoring capabilities and cost reduction;
Sustainability of the results of the review due to the independence of the system;
Effective preparation of ANSPs in the process towards safety oversight/certification (as applicable) by Civil Aviation Authorities;
Assurance on the continuous improvement of the safety and quality of air navigation services in the AFI region;
Assurance of a minimum level of safety oversight of ANSPs in States where the National Authorities face some difficulties (no ANSP left behind in the oversight process).

13. Qualifications of Peer Review Team Member
Essential
a) University degree, preferably in an aviation-related technical discipline or equivalent qualifications and experience;
b) Minimum five years’ experience working with an ANSP, as an engineer, an ATCO, ATSEP, an inspector, auditor in any one of the following ANS audit areas: ATM, MET, AIM, CNS, SAR and SMS

14. Qualifications of Peer Review Team Member
Essential
c) Working knowledge of the Convention on International Civil Aviation (Doc 7300), the adoption and implementation of SARPs, and of related ICAO documentation and guidance material pertaining to ANS;
d) Working knowledge of States safety oversight systems and responsibilities of national, regional and supranational safety oversight organizations.

15. Main Challenges Member States: Secretariat:
Need for national, regional and global air navigation planning alignment
Not same implementation needs
Optimize allocation and use of resources for air navigation
Secretariat:
Need to improve the communication with different stakeholders to better explain the purpose of the ASBU framework
Need to provide better guidance on how stakeholders would benefit if focused on performance
Based on consultation with member States, we have ascertained the following challenges when implementing the current areas of priority of the GANP:
It is challenging for some States to make the best allocation and use of the available resources when they do not know their needs. The lack of need analysis and national air navigation planning or strategy drive States to invest in systems that they do not need to solve problems that they do not have. Not all the States have the same implementation needs, some of them are facing problems with capacity, others with efficiency or interoperability. In addition, there is not one unique best solution for States with the same problem, due to the different operational scenarios. Resources are always limited and States that know what they need and the challenges they are facing, are reticent to invest in specific implementation solutions that might not solve their problems.
Secretariat is also facing some challenges for improved understanding:
ICAO needs a campaign to improve the common understanding of the ASBU framework and the method to be followed for the proper utilization of the ASBU framework based on needs analysis and identification of optimum solutions. Due to the different States needs, this method should be based on a need analysis and optimum solution identification to improve the overall performance of the air navigation system making the best of the resources available.
A mechanism is needed to assist the States in the definition of national air navigation planning strategies within the national development umbrella to ensure the necessary investments in the air navigation system to cope with challenges such as the increase in traffic, the increase in the number and type of airspace users in a safe, secure and sustainable manner. The focus should be in the final performance expected from the system. As well as in the GASP, there is a need for greater emphasis on implementation support, by way of tools, subject matter expertise sharing and workshops.

16. Qualifications of Peer Review Team Member
Desirable a) Knowledge of ICAO organization, functions and activities; b) Aviation industry experience with one of the following entities: air operator, aviation training organization, air traffic service provider, aerodrome operator, or aircraft accident and incident investigation authority or similar organizations; c) Certification as a Quality Management System (QMS) Expert.